Comments on: Pot legalization is on the ballot in three US states. What happens when one state says yes to weed?http://boingboing.net/2012/07/26/pot-legalization-is-on-the-bal.html
Brain candy for Happy MutantsMon, 15 Sep 2014 23:11:17 +0000hourly1http://wordpress.org/?v=4.1.1By: Sasha@librteehttp://boingboing.net/2012/07/26/pot-legalization-is-on-the-bal.html#comment-1492950
Mon, 30 Jul 2012 11:38:00 +0000http://boingboing.net/?p=173391#comment-1492950I have often been criticized on these boards for promoting ‘states rights.’

Don’t you see, progressives, that the knife cuts both ways.

]]>By: Sasha@librteehttp://boingboing.net/2012/07/26/pot-legalization-is-on-the-bal.html#comment-1492944
Mon, 30 Jul 2012 10:54:00 +0000http://boingboing.net/?p=173391#comment-1492944There’s an important point to make.

DON’T tax and regulate. Doing that will inevitably create a database of growers; that will be easy pickings for the Feds whenever their prisons are getting a bit too empty.

No, the slogan should be ‘LEGAL LIKE TOMATOES.’Sure, charge a tax on sales. But unless we have complete legality to simply grow it wherever, legalization won’t go far enough and will still result in prosecutions down the road.

]]>By: Antinous / Moderatorhttp://boingboing.net/2012/07/26/pot-legalization-is-on-the-bal.html#comment-1492887
Mon, 30 Jul 2012 05:27:00 +0000http://boingboing.net/?p=173391#comment-1492887My guess would be that the Feds pay better, and the locals wouldn’t want to piss off a potential future employer.
]]>By: Daemonworkshttp://boingboing.net/2012/07/26/pot-legalization-is-on-the-bal.html#comment-1492853
Mon, 30 Jul 2012 02:59:00 +0000http://boingboing.net/?p=173391#comment-1492853Hmm. What happens if a state passes a law making it illegal to enforce the federal law.
The feds move in to arrest somebody for possession, and then the local boys move in and arrest the feds. Now wouldn’t that be fun?
]]>By: davehttp://boingboing.net/2012/07/26/pot-legalization-is-on-the-bal.html#comment-1492740
Sun, 29 Jul 2012 21:44:00 +0000http://boingboing.net/?p=173391#comment-1492740Wow it’s a really good thing the internet has you to keep that nugget of knowledge going. I guess we’ll just have to take you at your word. If I wanna cite this in a paper, should I put “Funk Daddy” in parenthesis at the end of the sentence?
]]>By: Antinous / Moderatorhttp://boingboing.net/2012/07/26/pot-legalization-is-on-the-bal.html#comment-1492737
Sun, 29 Jul 2012 21:41:00 +0000http://boingboing.net/?p=173391#comment-1492737Surely we could just hold them for being non-white or gay or looking like vagrants.
]]>By: spacedmonkeyhttp://boingboing.net/2012/07/26/pot-legalization-is-on-the-bal.html#comment-1492735
Sun, 29 Jul 2012 21:21:00 +0000http://boingboing.net/?p=173391#comment-1492735Really? So you think it’s good to have something the cops can just arrest and harass anybody for even if they aren’t hurting anyone else? You must have a lot more faith in the honesty and generally beneficient nature of cops than I do.I mean, there’s so much wrong with what you just posted I don’t even know where to begin. It sounds like you don’t think possession should be a crime, but you think it’s a good idea to have a law that gives the cops the power to arrest anyone they want, any time they want to.
]]>By: Cheryl Carterhttp://boingboing.net/2012/07/26/pot-legalization-is-on-the-bal.html#comment-1492697
Sun, 29 Jul 2012 19:51:00 +0000http://boingboing.net/?p=173391#comment-1492697My only concern with the legalization of marijuana is that it will hamper law enforcement in doing their job. Many a criminal has been held in jail for possession while the police gather more evidence to arrest him/her of more serious crimes.
]]>By: Dv Revolutionaryhttp://boingboing.net/2012/07/26/pot-legalization-is-on-the-bal.html#comment-1492606
Sun, 29 Jul 2012 16:03:00 +0000http://boingboing.net/?p=173391#comment-1492606Cocaine is Schedule II. It can be administered by a physician (not a nurse) for a limited number of medical situations.

They have marijuana scheduled higher than cocaine in their bizarro world.

]]>By: Funk Daddyhttp://boingboing.net/2012/07/26/pot-legalization-is-on-the-bal.html#comment-1492529
Sun, 29 Jul 2012 12:40:00 +0000http://boingboing.net/?p=173391#comment-1492529A remark deliberately distorting my mention of gay marriage in a way that makes you appear a bit of a homophobe, when coupled with your refusal to answer the simple question posed.

Then you resort again to oversimplification, presuming yet again that one man can fix things. Not even the president, it takes time and victories on multiple fronts.

But again, answer the question. -of the two contenders-

]]>By: Kurvel Vrecehttp://boingboing.net/2012/07/26/pot-legalization-is-on-the-bal.html#comment-1492525
Sun, 29 Jul 2012 12:14:00 +0000http://boingboing.net/?p=173391#comment-1492525Good call, they could be hoping for an overall change while forcing the federal government to do their dirty work. Either way it’s win/win for them. They get to look hip and progressive or claim success on cracking down drug activity. It’s politics.
]]>By: tréhttp://boingboing.net/2012/07/26/pot-legalization-is-on-the-bal.html#comment-1491917
Sat, 28 Jul 2012 16:40:00 +0000http://boingboing.net/?p=173391#comment-1491917The President has control over scheduling; Obama could legalize within the half hour if he wanted (though it wouldn’t go into effect for a little bit). If a drug is schedule I, then it is illegal anywhere in the US. Most (all?) states have their own cannabis laws, meaning it is both a federal and state offense.
If cannabis where moved to, say, schedule II (medical but restricted), then it would be a federal offense to use (or sell or produce, etc) it in non-medical and non-prescribed fashion, as well as whatever kind of offense it would be in that state. For example, if it were moved to schedule II but still entirely illegal under state law (like, let’s say, ND, where you can get prison time for a resin stain on your tie-dyed Jim Morrison shirt), then you would still be subject to state law even if you had a prescription from medicalized neighbor state Montana. Even if cannabis were descheduled, like basil, North Dakota (and others) could still make it a crime in their state, while others could let it well alone, or anything in-between (decriminalize but not legalize, medicalize but not legalize, etc).
It’s kind of like abortion laws: the feds have their own rules, and some states have stricter rules on top of those that you are supposed to follow in those states.
Does that help?
]]>By: lafavehttp://boingboing.net/2012/07/26/pot-legalization-is-on-the-bal.html#comment-1491658
Sat, 28 Jul 2012 02:10:00 +0000http://boingboing.net/?p=173391#comment-1491658 I’m sure you’re a nice dude, but I don’t want to gay marry you.

The DEA is an executive branch agency. Barack Obama is responsible for its direction and tone. The buck stops at the Oval Office. If he wanted to keep his campaign promises, he re: drug laws and enforcement, he could have. He could fire Leonhart at will, but he hasn’t and won’t.

I’ll never understand those who still see Obama as a candidate for change.

But really, ordering all those dispensaries closed himself was he? Natch.

Of the two contenders, which one is actually able to make a reasoned change in a stance, regardless of outside definitions of his motivation, if the change in question is against status quo culturally?

Yeah.

Change comes slow and hard, people that feel let down by one man were fools to begin with.

Cutting off this part of the tumor would be nice but I would like to kill the problem at the root of the tumor.

While you’re reinventing society from the ground up, would it be okay if people with cancer could get drugs that would make their lives more bearable?

]]>By: Kl-0http://boingboing.net/2012/07/26/pot-legalization-is-on-the-bal.html#comment-1491385
Fri, 27 Jul 2012 21:38:00 +0000http://boingboing.net/?p=173391#comment-1491385 Ah, I hadn’t thought about that! I don’t really know ins-and-outs of federal drug law well enough; are states allowed more freedom to regulate drugs if they aren’t schedule I? Further, the President has the authority to change where on the schedule a particular drug appears? If both are true, thats an interesting possibility, although it still seems there would be potential problems with the whims of future administrations (deciding to switch drugs around and what not?).
]]>By: Kl-0http://boingboing.net/2012/07/26/pot-legalization-is-on-the-bal.html#comment-1491380
Fri, 27 Jul 2012 21:35:00 +0000http://boingboing.net/?p=173391#comment-1491380This wouldn’t work within our current legal framework (of federalism / nationalism) for a variety of reasons which are difficult to get into in a meaningful way in this type of forum. The very very short version (which will leave a lot of blank spots on the map) is this: 1) It has been ruled that the federal government may regulate drug policy (under Commerce Clause authority) 2) The federal government may make laws which are “necessary and proper” to effectuate their Commerce Clause powers ( see one of the most famous cases in the history of American jurisprudence for the basics: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mcculloch_v_maryland 3. Valid federal laws “preempt” state laws in many circumstances, including when they directly conflict. This was actually addressed recently by the Court in the Arizona immigration case. The federal government (amongst other things) was basically arguing that the state of Arizona was setting up its own foreign policy scheme, which the Court did not let fly.
Anywho, interesting stuff to think about.
]]>By: *J*E*S*N*E*http://boingboing.net/2012/07/26/pot-legalization-is-on-the-bal.html#comment-1491287
Fri, 27 Jul 2012 20:33:00 +0000http://boingboing.net/?p=173391#comment-1491287FEDERALI’S ARE THIEVING FROM THEIR BUSTS, THEY ARE GUILTY OF TAKING WHAT WAS NEVER THEIRS!
]]>By: Spieguhhttp://boingboing.net/2012/07/26/pot-legalization-is-on-the-bal.html#comment-1491225
Fri, 27 Jul 2012 19:55:00 +0000http://boingboing.net/?p=173391#comment-1491225 Okay, that was weird.
]]>By: LEAPhttp://boingboing.net/2012/07/26/pot-legalization-is-on-the-bal.html#comment-1490990
Fri, 27 Jul 2012 17:22:00 +0000http://boingboing.net/?p=173391#comment-1490990What happens? What happens is all the politicians who already agree with us behind closed doors finally realize that this issue isn’t some dangerous third rail of politics and that it’s actually a mainstream, majority-support issue.
]]>By: MB44http://boingboing.net/2012/07/26/pot-legalization-is-on-the-bal.html#comment-1490969
Fri, 27 Jul 2012 17:09:00 +0000http://boingboing.net/?p=173391#comment-1490969I’m work but: The base of my argument is that if the financial fraud that has fleeced our country and working class people into new-age slavery was addressed at the root, then the other problems that we have (like the inability to do something as simple and reasonable like legalize and tax marijuana) would fall into place because we would have reigned in the corrupt financial interests that make doing simple things so fucking difficult. To go back to your medical analogy, I feel that the issue of legalization is near the top of the tumor that is our combined societal heap of problems. Cutting off this part of the tumor would be nice but I would like to kill the problem at the root of the tumor. The financial elite in this country love it when the masses are distracted with other things besides stopping them from continuing to rape us of our resources and our potential for economic prosperity. I know that there are some efforts to do this like you mentioned. I was basically saying that I was jealous of the cause of legalization because it has somehow gained so much traction at a grassroots level. These things that I fight for are not as sexy but I truly feel that if we were to tackle them, legalization wouldn’t be a debate but just the logical step for our society to take as a progressive and aware group of people that didn’t let the .4 percent control everything that we did at a societal level. Sorry I really have to go now.
]]>By: Nathan Hornbyhttp://boingboing.net/2012/07/26/pot-legalization-is-on-the-bal.html#comment-1490921
Fri, 27 Jul 2012 16:44:00 +0000http://boingboing.net/?p=173391#comment-1490921I believe that with all Internet debates, this is the case.

Snide is fine, I’m still trying to provoke another, ‘I beg your pardon?’. I’ve only collected one so far.

]]>By: MB44http://boingboing.net/2012/07/26/pot-legalization-is-on-the-bal.html#comment-1490891
Fri, 27 Jul 2012 16:26:00 +0000http://boingboing.net/?p=173391#comment-1490891Ok, ok. I think we would find some more common grounds on this than can be transfered through internet conversation if it was over beers or something. Have a good day man and good luck with all. Sorry if I was snide.
]]>By: Nathan Hornbyhttp://boingboing.net/2012/07/26/pot-legalization-is-on-the-bal.html#comment-1490816
Fri, 27 Jul 2012 15:37:00 +0000http://boingboing.net/?p=173391#comment-1490816I just went and read it again, and it still sounds like you’re suggesting that there are better things to be spending our time on (which was the point I was refuting). Which is odd as the action I’ve seen against the 1% / bankers / government is infinitely bigger than that of pot criminalisation. So now, after re reading, disagree with you on 2 levels :)
]]>By: MB44http://boingboing.net/2012/07/26/pot-legalization-is-on-the-bal.html#comment-1490805
Fri, 27 Jul 2012 15:26:00 +0000http://boingboing.net/?p=173391#comment-1490805The only reason I said that is that, given the context of my original statement, I thought that you were drawing a parallel that didn’t make any sense or address the comment that I made at all. Maybe go back up and read my original statement and read my comment for what it was and not make up something else in your own head.
]]>By: MB44http://boingboing.net/2012/07/26/pot-legalization-is-on-the-bal.html#comment-1490790
Fri, 27 Jul 2012 15:16:00 +0000http://boingboing.net/?p=173391#comment-1490790Yeah people are taking me for saying that marijuana legalization wasn’t a legitimate concern when actually all I was saying was that I wish that we could focus energy on the biggest fish. Strike at the root of the problem.
]]>By: MB44http://boingboing.net/2012/07/26/pot-legalization-is-on-the-bal.html#comment-1490787
Fri, 27 Jul 2012 15:14:00 +0000http://boingboing.net/?p=173391#comment-1490787I think you are being condescending and I know that I invited that by suggesting that the internet’s holy cow of causes wasn’t as holy as some claim but don’t assume that I do not understand the drug war and the shit that it causes just because I think that there are problems that eclipse it on the larger scale. Even your own number of 30 billion is a paltry sum compared to the trillions that I am talking about.
]]>By: Nathan Hornbyhttp://boingboing.net/2012/07/26/pot-legalization-is-on-the-bal.html#comment-1490784
Fri, 27 Jul 2012 15:13:00 +0000http://boingboing.net/?p=173391#comment-1490784Because making people’s lives more pleasant is as important as extending them? Although the point is that it doesn’t require justification, I was using that as an example of how silly you were being.

Should every top-level discipline be focussed on one goal? Is that actually how the world should work in your head? Even in politics where everyone’s interests and agendas are completely different? Mind, boggled.

]]>By: MB44http://boingboing.net/2012/07/26/pot-legalization-is-on-the-bal.html#comment-1490776
Fri, 27 Jul 2012 15:09:00 +0000http://boingboing.net/?p=173391#comment-1490776I understand the bigger picture of the drug war and you shouldn’t assume that I am so privileged that I can’t wrap my mind around it. My position is that the drug war, while affecting many, is a drop in the bucket compared to the trillions that have been filtered out of our economies and into the pockets of the people that have set up the rules of the game in a way that it makes it easy for them to do so. I have been to worst edges of some of the countries and experienced the horrors of the failed “drug war” first hand so I am sorry if my comment led you to believe otherwise.
]]>By: MB44http://boingboing.net/2012/07/26/pot-legalization-is-on-the-bal.html#comment-1490762
Fri, 27 Jul 2012 15:03:00 +0000http://boingboing.net/?p=173391#comment-1490762You read it correctly. I was basically saying, “Why are scientists working on curing acne when they could be curing cancer.”
]]>